that is a good question actually.

Do VM only count areas that have breached their utilisation threshold as congested, or they do count all areas where customers are reporting congestion but may not have breached VM's threshold?

When I was on VM, their utilisation threshold was basically a **** take.

Of course if the 3% of some 4 million customers is a lot of people and if just 1% of those are vocal online it can easily look like a massive problem.

We did see VM speeds dip from the summer onwards, but they seem to have recovered. Why no massive shouting from us, because you cannot be 100% sure it is congestion based without spending a few weeks analysing the patterns and verifying data.

The dip was just getting to the point where we would have taken that time, but then we started to see a recovery.

3% 4m is 120k

I would still say more are affected by utilisation issues, though they may not be classified as utilisation issues "yet" due to the stupidly high thresholds...

The results you receive are from the speed checker and that is not as popular as you might hope, where Ookla is widely known... Also Virgin Media technical department don't even know who TBB are or even that it has a speed checker.

I was going to recommend it to customers who I'm currently in contact with to monitor not just HTTP x6 but also x1 but I noticed these results aren't available to those who aren't subscribed to the website.

Both versions are available to anonymous users

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/speedtest2.html the flash for those that still dare keep flash installed.
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest.html

Utilisation issues should still be visible on the HTTPx6 tests particularly if getting to the point of people noticing.

As for Virgin Media not being aware of who we are, then obviously I have not have the various conversations of the last few months and previous years with them.

NOTE: You CANNOT rely on Ookla NetIndex to give you speeds for towns in the UK, it is seriously broken, they even only can claim three providers with results in Crawley and Dorking has none.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Both versions are available to anonymous users

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/speedtest2.html the flash for those that still dare keep flash installed.
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest.html

My apologies your right!

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Utilisation issues should still be visible on the HTTPx6 tests particularly if getting to the point of people noticing.

Yes they are visible at the worst times of day but if the HTTP x1 test is low throughout the day even when HTTPx6 is or high or can even acheive the full speed advertised..

I just got http://www.thinkbroadband.com/speedtest/button/14230...
and you will notice that the HTTPx1 is low.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

As for Virgin Media not being aware of who we are, then obviously I have not have the various conversations of the last few months and previous years with them.

I'm not saying they don't know who you are, I know that the staff who know what they are doing, know who TBB is, I'm saying the Technical Support (via the phone) don't know who you are and are not recommending your test to customers with issue, they tell them to test on speedtest.net

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

NOTE: You CANNOT rely on Ookla NetIndex to give you speeds for towns in the UK, it is seriously broken, they even only can claim three providers with results in Crawley and Dorking has none.

I didn't say it could be, and agree that it is a bit off, I was just pointing out that very few people understand broadband and even now I have many customers in Crawley telling me their broadband is fine and then when they test and get 20mbps of their 100mbps service they're stumped.

I will be recommending your speedtest to Crawley customers using the local social network Streetlife, so hopefully some will do a test and even input their postcode so it can be mapped.

I feel this could benefit us both as I will get results to see if anything is improving or if customers are being taken for a joyride and you can expand your results for Crawley and maybe beyond.

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

I'm not saying they don't know who you are, I know that the staff who know what they are doing, know who TBB is, I'm saying the Technical Support (via the phone) don't know who you are and are not recommending your test to customers with issue, they tell them to test on speedtest.net

Virgin host Ookla test servers on their network, nothing more to this point than that.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

Virgin host Ookla test servers on their network, nothing more to this point than that.

Your point being?

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

Now I wasn't aware that you worked for Vrgin Media!

If what your saying regarding the 3% is true, what does it include?

By that I mean, what percentage of utilisation on a UBR is classed as over-utilised?

I know from what Virgin Forum Staff have said the level at which utilisation is considered over-utilised is pretty high, so maybe this is my mistake as most utilisation related issues arn't yet considered over-utilised!

I don't work for Virgin Media, I am a former staffer of one of its constituent companies.

The 3% is the number of ports that have reached the planning thresholds.

I wouldn't go as far as saying that 'most' utilisation related issues aren't yet considered over-utilised. You describe yourself as a perfection junkie which frames your opinion. A loss of speed over peak period is normal on broadband networks, no customer on a mass market ISP in the UK is paying enough to assure line rate all the time.

A quick look at the VM forums actually suggests that most of the issues raised there either already have plans in place for capacity relief or are at thresholds. I'm aware you can't post there as both the accounts you used have met the ban hammer but you should be able to both read and search posts okay.

In reply to a post by mlmclaren:

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

Virgin host Ookla test servers on their network, nothing more to this point than that.

Your point being?

Should be obvious. It eliminates the possibility of results being affected by 3rd party issues, such as connectivity problems to external speed tests or issues with those speed tests.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Of course if the 3% of some 4 million customers is a lot of people and if just 1% of those are vocal online it can easily look like a massive problem.

We did see VM speeds dip from the summer onwards, but they seem to have recovered. Why no massive shouting from us, because you cannot be 100% sure it is congestion based without spending a few weeks analysing the patterns and verifying data.

The dip was just getting to the point where we would have taken that time, but then we started to see a recovery.

The dip and recovery would make sense - VM have been very busy in the background on what are, as I mentioned earlier, programmes that take a while before their impact is seen.

Replacing a CMTS isn't a rapid exercise even if there are no issues, splitting nodes much the same if there's no spare fibres and it's an easy split of an existing multi-output node.

The growth of utilisation was also considerably faster than expected which is more of a problem for VM than it generally is for BT Wholesale as the upgrade process is more protracted so being late starting means a considerable drag time.